12238 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

mailings that are verified and paid for 

by September 30, 2013 may be entered 

at destination entry facilities through 

October 15, 2013. 

3.3.6 Mobile Buy-It Now 

The Mobile Buy-It-Now promotion 

provides mailers (of presort and 

automation First-Class Mail cards, 

letters, and flats and Standard Mail 

letters and flats) with an upfront 2 

percent postage discount. Qualifying 

mailpieces must include a twodimensional barcode or print/mobile 

technology that can be read or scanned 

by a mobile device, directly leading the 

recipient to a mobile-optimized Web 

page that allows the purchase of an 

advertised product through a financial 

transaction on the mobile device. The 

mailpiece must also contain text near 

the image that guides the consumer to 

scan the image. These additional 

requirements apply: 

a. The destination Web page must 

contain information relevant to the 

content of the mailpiece and some of the 

products advertised must be available 

for purchase on a mobile device. 

b. The purchase must be able to be 

completed through the mobile device 

via an electronic payment method, or by 

allowing an order placed on the mobile 

device through the Internet leading to a 

subsequent invoice. 

c. A product, for purposes of this 

promotion, is defined as a tangible and 

physical item that can be shipped via a 

mailng or shipping product offered by 

the USPS (although delivery by the 

USPS is not required). 

d. Products must be offered for 

fulfillment via home delivery; products 

offered as shipments for in-store pickup 

only will not qualify. 

3.4 Discounts 

For all promotion providing an 

upfront postage discount, mailers must 

claim the postage discount on the 

postage statement at the time the 

statement is electronically submitted. 

Mailings with postage affixed will 

deduct the discount amount from the 

additional postage due, except that mail 

service providers authorized to submit 

Value Added Refund (‘‘VAR’’) mailings 

may include the discount in the amount 

to be refunded. See also 3.2. 

3.5 Mobile Barcode or Image 

Placement 

For promotions that include printing 

of a mobile barcode or other scannable 

printed image, the image cannot be 

placed on a detached address label 

(DAL or DML) or card that is not 

attached to the mailpiece. The image 

cannot be placed in the (postage) indicia 

zone or the (Intelligent Mail) barcode 

clear zone on the outside of the 

mailpiece. For letters, the barcode clear 

zone is defined in 202.5.1. For flats, the 

barcode clear zone for this purpose is 

the barcode itself and an area that 

extends an additional 1⁄8 inch from any 

part of the barcode. The indicia zone is 

defined as follows: 

a. The postage ‘‘indicia zone’’ is 2 

inches from the top edge by 4 inches 

from the right edge of the mailpiece; 

b. When the postage indicium is not 

in the area described in 3.4a, the mobile 

barcode or image must not be placed 

within 2 inches of the actual postage 

indicium. 

* * * * * 

We will publish an appropriate 

amendment to 39 CFR part 111 to reflect 

these changes. 

Stanley F. Mires, 

Attorney, Legal Policy and Legislative Advice. 

[FR Doc. 2013–03926 Filed 2–21–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–12–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0961; FRL–9782–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and 

Winston-Salem Carbon Monoxide 

Limited Maintenance Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve a limited maintenance 

plan update submitted by the State of 

North Carolina, through the North 

Carolina Department of Environment 

and Natural Resources (NC DENR), on 

August 2, 2012. The limited 

maintenance plan update is for the 

Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and 

Winston-Salem carbon monoxide (CO) 

maintenance areas. Specifically, the 

State submitted a limited maintenance 

plan update for CO, showing continued 

attainment of the 8-hour CO National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) 

for the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and 

Winston-Salem Areas. The 8-hour CO 

NAAQS is 9 parts per million (ppm). 

EPA is taking direct final action to 

approve the limited maintenance plan 

update because it is consistent with the 

Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), and EPA’s 

policy for limited maintenance plans. 

DATES: This direct final rule is effective 

April 23, 2013 without further notice, 

unless EPA receives adverse comment 

by March 25, 2013. If EPA receives such 

comments, it will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the 

Federal Register and inform the public 

that the rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2012–0961, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: R4-RDS@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0961, 

Regulatory Development Section, Air 

Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae 

Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2012– 

0961. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 12239 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at the Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richard Wong, Regulatory Development 

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 

Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The 

telephone number is (404) 562–8726. 

Mr. Wong can be reached via electronic 

mail at wong.richard@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. What criteria is EPA using to evaluate this 

submittal? 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of this submittal? 

A. Requirements of Section 175A of the 

CAA 

B. Consistency With the October 6, 1995, 

Memorandum 

1. Attainment Inventory 

2. Maintenance Demonstration 

3. Monitoring Network and Verification of 

Continued Attainment 

4. Contingency Plan 

5. Conformity Determination Under 

Limited Maintenance Plan 

IV. Final Action 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

A maintenance plan, as defined in 

section 175A of the CAA, is a revision 

to the SIP to provide for the 

maintenance of the NAAQS for the air 

pollutant in question in the area 

concerned for at least 10 years after the 

redesignation. Eight years after the 

redesignation, states are required to 

submit an update to the maintenance 

plan to provide for the maintenance of 

the NAAQS for another 10 years after 

the initial 10 year period has expired. 

North Carolina’s second maintenance 

plan for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham 

and Winston-Salem Areas was approved 

on March 24, 2006 (71 FR 14817). 

A limited maintenance plan for CO is 

a maintenance plan that is available to 

states that have demonstrated that the 

design values for CO in the 

nonclassifiable nonattainment or 

maintenance area are at, or below, 7.65 

ppm or 85 percent of the 8-hour CO 

NAAQS. To qualify for a limited 

maintenance plan, the area’s design 

value must not exceed the 7.65 ppm 

threshold throughout the entire 

rulemaking process. The design value 

for CO is defined as the second highest 

reading in the area in a two-year period. 

Should an area have more than one 

monitor, the monitor with the second 

highest value in a two-year period 

serves as the design monitor. EPA has 

also previously determined that the 

limited maintenance plan for CO is 

available to all states as part of their 

update to the maintenance plans as per 

section 175A(b), regardless of the 

original nonattainment classification, or 

lack thereof. 

NC DENR elected to convert its 

second 10-year maintenance plan for CO 

to a limited maintenance plan, to 

provide additional flexibility for 

implementing transportation conformity 

requirements in these CO maintenance 

areas. Briefly, counties in the Charlotte, 

Raleigh-Durham and Winston-Salem 

Areas were previously designated 

nonattainment for the 8-hour CO 

NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694, November 6, 

1991. These areas subsequently attained 

the 8-hour CO NAAQS and were 

redesignated from nonattainment to 

attainment. On November 7, 1994, EPA 

redesignated the Winston-Salem Area to 

attainment for the 8-hour CO NAAQS 

based on the measured air quality data 

and a 10-year maintenance plan 

submitted for the Winston-Salem Area. 

See 59 FR 48399. Additionally, on 

September 18, 1995, EPA redesignated 

both the Charlotte Area and the RaleighDurham Area to attainment for the 8- 

hour CO NAAQS based on the measured 

air quality data and the 10-year 

maintenance plan submitted for these 

areas. See 60 FR 39258. 

Section 175A(b) of the CAA mandates 

that the State shall submit an additional 

revision to the maintenance plan eight 

years after redesignation of any area as 

an attainment area. NC DENR fulfilled 

this requirement by providing the 

second and final maintenance plan for 

all three CO maintenance areas in the 

State. EPA subsequently approved NC 

DENR’s maintenance plan. In summary, 

on March 24, 2006, EPA approved the 

second 10-year maintenance plan for the 

Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and 

Winston-Salem CO Maintenance Areas, 

which are composed of the following 

four counties: Mecklenburg (Charlotte 

Area); Durham and Wake (RaleighDurham Area); and Forsyth (WinstonSalem Area). See 71 FR 14817. 

As mentioned above, NC DENR 

elected to convert the second 

maintenance plan for the Charlotte, 

Raleigh-Durham and Winston-Salem 

Areas to a limited maintenance plan for 

the ease of implementing transportation 

conformity requirements for the CO 

NAAQS. The limited maintenance plans 

was submitted on August 2, 2012, for 

EPA approval. EPA has made the 

determination that North Carolina’s 

limited maintenance plan satisfies the 

requirements for section 175A 

maintenance plan, and is consistent 

with EPA’s policy for limited 

maintenance plan elements as outlined 

in an October 6, 1995, memorandum 

from the Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards , entitled ‘‘Limited 

Maintenance Plan Option for 

Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment 

Areas’’ (October 6, 1995, Memorandum). 

More information regarding limited 

maintenance plan requirements is 

provided below. 

II. What criteria is EPA using to 

evaluate this submittal? 

In addition to the general 

requirements in section 175A of the 

CAA, guidance for CO limited 

maintenance plans is provided in the 

October 6, 1995, memorandum, which 

states that the following five 

components need to be addressed: (1) 

Attainment inventory; (2) maintenance 

demonstration; (3) monitoring network/ 

verification of continued attainment; (4) 

contingency plan; and (5) conformity 

determinations under limited 

maintenance plans. These elements 

were outlined in the October 6, 1995, 

EPA memorandum, and are 

comprehensively discussed below. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
12240 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of this 

submittal? 

A. Requirements of Section 175A of the 

CAA 

Section 175A contains four 

subsections pertaining to maintenance 

plans. Section 175A(a) establishes 

requirements for initial SIP 

redesignation request maintenance 

plans, as previously addressed by North 

Carolina and subsequently approved by 

EPA for all three of North Carolina’s CO 

areas. See 59 FR 48399 and 60 FR 

39258. 

Section 175A(b) requires States to 

submit an update to the maintenance 

plan eight years following the original 

redesignation to attainment. For the 

section 175A(b) update, the State must 

outline methods for maintaining the 

pertinent NAAQS for ten years after the 

expiration of the ten-year period 

referred to in subsection (a), i.e., North 

Carolina’s maintenance plan update 

must outline methods for maintaining 

the CO NAAQS through 2015, NC DENR 

satisfied the requirements for the second 

maintenance plans for all of its CO 

maintenance areas, and EPA 

subsequently approved NC DENR’s 

second maintenance plan for each of its 

CO maintenance areas. See 71 FR 14817, 

March 24, 2006. As indicated above, 

although North Carolina has previously 

satisfied the requirements for the 

175A(b) maintenance plan updates for 

all of its CO areas, the State has elected 

to convert these maintenance plans to 

limited maintenance plans. 

Section 175A(c) does not apply to this 

rulemaking, given that EPA has 

previously redesignated the Charlotte, 

Raleigh/Durham, and Winston-Salem 

areas to attainment for CO. 

Section 175A(d) which included the 

contingency provisions requirements 

are addressed in detail in section B4, 

below. 

B. Consistency With the October 6, 1995, 

Memorandum 

As discussed above, EPA’s 

interpretation of section 175A of the 

CAA, as it pertains to limited 

maintenance plans for CO, is contained 

in the October 6, 1995, Memorandum. 

North Carolina addressed the five major 

elements of that policy, as follows: 

1. Attainment Inventory 

The State is required to develop an 

attainment emissions inventory to 

identify a level of emissions in the area 

which is sufficient to attain the CO 

NAAQS. This inventory should be 

consistent with EPA’s most recent 

guidance on emission inventories for 

nonattainment areas available at the 

time and should include the emissions 

during the time period associated with 

the monitoring data showing 

attainment. It should be based on actual 

‘‘typical CO season day’’ emissions for 

all source classifications (i.e., stationary 

point and area sources and nonroad and 

onroad mobile sources) for the 

attainment year. In its August 2, 2012, 

submittal, NC DENR provided a 

comprehensive CO emissions inventory 

for nonroad mobile, onroad mobile, 

point, and area sources for the Charlotte, 

Raleigh-Durham, and Winston-Salem 

CO Maintenance Areas. 

NC DENR collected or developed 

point source emissions inventory from 

stationary sources that have the 

potential to emit more than five tons per 

year of CO emissions from a single 

facility and are required to have an 

operating permit. The stationary area 

source inventory is estimated on a 

county level and consisted of those 

sources whose emissions are relatively 

small, but due to the large number of 

sources, the collective emissions could 

be significant. North Carolina estimated 

the stationary area source emissions by 

multiplying an emission factor by some 

known indicator of collective activity 

(such as fuel usage, number of 

households, or population). For on-road 

mobile source emissions, NC DENR 

used USEPA’s Motor Vehicle Emission 

Simulator (MOVES) model version 

2010a (i.e., MOVES2010a), released in 

August 2010, for estimating vehicle 

emissions. Nonroad mobile sources are 

pieces of equipment that can move but 

do not use roadways (e.g. lawn mowers, 

construction equipment, railroad 

locomotives, aircraft). The emissions 

from this category are calculated at the 

county level using USEPA’s 

NONROAD2008s nonroad mobile 

model, with the exception of railroad 

locomotives and aircraft engines. The 

railroad locomotives and aircraft 

engines are estimated by taking an 

activity and multiplying by an emission 

factor. Table 1 displays the 2010 

attainment year emissions inventory as 

required for the limited maintenance 

plans. Appendix B of North Carolina’s 

SIP submittal provides detailed 

discussions regarding the development 

of emissions for the four emission 

source classifications, and is provided 

in the docket for today’s rulemaking. 

TABLE 1—2010 CO EMISSIONS (TONS/DAY) FOR MAINTENANCE AREAS

County Point 

source 

Area 

source On-road Nonroad Total 

Raleigh-Durham Maintenance Area 

Durham .................................................................................................... 0.97 1.54 186.00 19.04 207.55 

Wake ........................................................................................................ 1.17 4.26 642.97 70.62 719.02 

Total .................................................................................................. 2.14 5.80 828.97 89.66 926.57 

Winston-Salem Maintenance Area 

Forsyth ..................................................................................................... 2.22 1.41 244.16 23.97 271.76 

Charlotte Maintenance Area 

Mecklenburg ............................................................................................ 2.39 4.21 724.39 114.71 845.70 

2. Maintenance Demonstration 

In the October 6, 1995, Memorandum, 

EPA stated that the maintenance 

demonstration requirement is 

considered to be satisfied for 

nonclassifiable areas if the monitoring 

data show that the area is meeting the 

air quality criteria for limited 

maintenance areas (i.e., 85 percent of 

the eight hour CO NAAQS, or 7.65 

ppm). EPA determined in this same 

memorandum that there is no 

requirement to protect emissions over 

the maintenance period. Instead, EPA 

believes that if the area begins the 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 12241 

maintenance period at, or below, 7.65 

ppm (85 percent of the 8-hour CO 

NAAQS), the applicability of prevention 

of significant deterioration (PSD) 

requirements, control measures already 

in the SIP, and other federal measures 

should provide adequate assurance of 

maintenance throughout the 

maintenance period. Monitoring data 

from 2008–2011 shows all three areas 

below the 8-hour CO NAAQS values as 

listed in Table 2. All monitoring levels 

are well below the 85 percent threshold 

of 7.65 ppm and therefore the State has 

satisfied the maintenance demonstration 

requirement for a limited maintenance 

plan for each of its CO maintenance 

areas. 

TABLE 2—CO 8-HOUR MONITORED CONCENTRATION NAAQS 

[parts per million] 

County Monitor ID 2009 2010 2011 8-hr NAAQS 

Raleigh-Durham Maintenance Area 

Wake .................................................................................................................... 371830014 1.3 1.3 1.4 9 

Winston-Salem Maintenance Area 

Forsyth ................................................................................................................. 370670023 1.7 1.9 2.1 9 

Charlotte Maintenance Area 

Mecklenburg ......................................................................................................... 371190041 1.7 1.7 1.5 9 

3. Monitoring Network and Verification 

of Continued Attainment 

Once an area has been redesignated, 

the state should continue to operate an 

appropriate air quality monitoring 

network, in accordance with 40 CFR 

Part 58, to verify the attainment status 

of the area. This is particularly 

important for areas using a limited 

maintenance plan because there will be 

no cap on emissions. In accordance with 

40 CFR Part 58, NC DENR commits to 

continue monitoring CO at these three 

sites to ensure that CO concentrations 

remain well below the 7.65 ppm 

threshold for limited maintenance 

plans. The State’s monitoring plan for 

2012 can be found at the following site: 

http://www.ncair.org/monitor/ 

monitoring_plan/new_plan/ 

2012_NCDAQ_Network_Plan.pdf. EPA 

has determined that the State has 

satisfied the monitoring network and 

verification of continued attainment 

requirements for the limited 

maintenance plan. 

4. Contingency Plan 

Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires 

that a maintenance plan include 

contingency provisions, as necessary, to 

promptly correct any violation of the 

NAAQS that occurs after redesignation 

of an area. The October 6, 1995, 

Memorandum further requires that the 

contingency provisions identify the 

measures to be adopted, a schedule and 

procedure for adoption and 

implementation, and a specific time 

limit for action by the state. 

In its August 2, 2012, submittal, NC 

DENR committed to the same 

contingency measures that EPA 

previously approved on March 24, 2006 

(71 FR 14817) and a subsequent 

clarification on June 19, 2007 (72 FR 

33692). The State pre-adopted an 

oxygenated fuels program with 

minimum oxygen content by weight of 

2.7 for Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and 

Winston-Salem maintenance areas. The 

oxygenated fuel program is required 

under the CAA for the Raleigh-Durham 

and Winston-Salem areas as a required 

control measure prior to the attainment 

redesignation. Charlotte was placed 

under oxygenated fuel program for 

effective area-wide CO emission 

reduction and ease for State 

implementation. The triggering date will 

be no more than 60 days after an 

ambient air quality violation is 

monitored. NC DENR will commence an 

analysis and regulation development 

process during this time. The State will 

consider the following control 

measures: 

a. Amending the oxygenated fuels 

program by adopting oxygenate content 

of 2.0 percent to 2.7 percent by weight, 

or activate of the 2.7 percent by eight 

pre-adopted contingency measure, or 

2.7 percent to 3.1 percent by weight. 

b. Expanding coverage of oxygenated 

fuels to include counties where a strong 

commuting pattern into the core 

maintenance area exists. 

c. Alternative fuel vehicle programs to 

include compressed natural gas and 

electric vehicles. 

d. Employee commute options 

programs. 

NC DENR committed to implement at 

least one of the control measures within 

24 months of the trigger, or as 

expeditiously as practicable. EPA has 

determined that the State has satisfied 

the contingency plan requirements 

pursuant to section 175A(d) of the CAA 

as well as those of the October 6, 1995, 

Memorandum. 

5. Conformity Determination Under 

Limited Maintenance Plan 

The transportation conformity rule of 

November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188), and 

the general conformity rule of November 

30, 1993 (58 FR 63214), apply to 

nonattainment areas and maintenance 

areas operating under the maintenance 

plans. Under either rule, one means of 

demonstrating conformity of federal 

actions is to indicate that expected 

emissions from planned actions are 

consistent with the emissions budget for 

the area. 

EPA’s October 6, 1995, Memorandum 

states that emissions budgets in limited 

maintenance plan areas may be treated 

as essentially not constraining for the 

length of the maintenance period 

because it is unreasonable to expect that 

such an area will experience so much 

growth in that period that a violation of 

the CO NAAQS would result. In other 

words, EPA concluded that, for these 

areas, emissions need not be capped for 

the maintenance period. 

In accordance with the Transportation 

conformity rule, approval of a limited 

maintenance plan only removes the 

requirement to conduct a regional 

emissions analysis as part of the 

conformity determination. The 

requirement to demonstrate conformity 

per the requirements in section 93.109, 

in Table 1 still applies. Additionally, 

federally funded projects are still 

subject to ‘‘Hot Spot’’ analysis 

requirements. However, no regional 

modeling analysis would be required. 

Transportation partners should note 

that this approval of these limited 

maintenance plans in future 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
12242 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

transportation conformity 

determinations. Additionally, while this 

finding waives the requirements for a 

regional emissions analysis for the CO, 

as mentioned above, it does not waive 

other conformity requirements for the 

CO standard for the Charlotte, RaleighDurham and Winston-Salem areas, and 

it does not waive transportation 

conformity requirement for other 

pollutants/precursors for which these 

areas may be designated nonattainment 

or redesigned to attainment with a full 

maintenance plan. 

The State has satisfied the conformity 

determination under limited 

maintenance plan requirements for the 

Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and 

Winston-Salem areas in this limited 

maintenance plan. 

IV. Final Action 

EPA is approving the CO limited 

maintenance plan for the Charlotte, 

Raleigh-Durham, and Winston-Salem 

Areas. The State of North Carolina has 

complied with the requirements of 

section 175A of the CAA, as interpreted 

by the guidance provided in the October 

6, 1995, Memorandum. North Carolina 

has shown monitored levels of CO in 

the three areas have been consistently 

well below the requisite level of 7.65 

ppm for the 8-hour CO NAAQS in order 

to qualify for the limited maintenance 

plan. North Carolina has also shown 

monitored values for the 8-hour CO 

NAAQS have been consistently well 

below the NAAQS levels from 2009– 

2011. EPA has made the determination 

that the North Carolina, August 2, 2012, 

submission providing the CO limited 

maintenance plan for the Charlotte, 

Raleigh-Durham, and Winston-Salem 

Areas is consistent with the CAA and 

EPA’s guidance on limited maintenance 

plans. This action is being taken 

pursuant to section 110 of the CAA. 

EPA is publishing this rule without 

prior proposal because the Agency 

views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. However, in the proposed 

rules section of this Federal Register 

publication, EPA is publishing a 

separate document that will serve as the 

proposal to approve the SIP revision 

should adverse comments be filed. This 

rule will be effective April 23, 2013 

without further notice unless the 

Agency receives adverse comments by 

March 25, 2013. 

If EPA receives such comments, then 

EPA will publish a document 

withdrawing the final rule and 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. All public comments 

received will then be addressed in a 

subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period. Parties 

interested in commenting should do so 

at this time. If no such comments are 

received, the public is advised that this 

rule will be effective on April 23, 2013 

and no further action will be taken on 

the proposed rule. Please note that if we 

receive adverse comment on an 

amendment, paragraph, or section of 

this rule and if that provision may be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

we may adopt as final those provisions 

of the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this final action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this final action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 F43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this final rule does not 

have tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by April 23, 2013. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. See section 

307(b)(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: February 11, 2013. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 12243 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart II—North Carolina 

■ 2. Section 52.1770(e) is amended by 

adding a new entry for entry for ‘‘8-Hour 

Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance 

Plan for Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and 

Winston-Salem Maintenance Areas.’’ at 

the end of the table to read as follows: 

§ 52.1770 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA APPROVED NORTH CAROLINA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Provision State effective date EPA approval 

date Federal Register citation Explanation 

*******

8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan 

for Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem 

Maintenance Area.

August 2, 2012 ................. 2/22/13 [Insert citation of publication].

[FR Doc. 2013–04011 Filed 2–21–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0094; FRL–9783–3] 

Interim Final Determination To Stay 

and Defer Sanctions, Placer County Air 

Pollution Control District and Feather 

River Air Quality Management District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Interim final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is making an interim 

final determination to stay the 

imposition of offset sanctions and to 

defer the imposition of highway 

sanctions based on a proposed approval 

of a revision to the Placer County Air 

Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) and 

Feather River Air Quality Management 

District (FRAQMD) portion of the 

California State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) published elsewhere in this 

Federal Register. The SIP revision 

concerns two permitting rules submitted 

by the PCAPCD and FRAQMD, 

respectively: Rule 502, New Source 

Review, and Rule 10.1, New Source 

Review. 

DATES: This interim final determination 

is effective on February 22, 2013. 

However, comments will be accepted 

until March 25, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2013–0094, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. Email: R9airpermits@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air3), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at http://www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or email. http:// 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send email 

directly to EPA, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the public comment. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Docket: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, California. While all 

documents in the docket are listed at 

http://www.regulations.gov, some 

information may be publicly available 

only at the hard copy location (e.g., 

copyrighted material, large maps), and 

some may not be publicly available in 

either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Laura Yannayon, EPA Region IX, (415) 

972–3534, yannayon.laura@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

I. Background 

On July 27, 2011 (76 FR 44809), we 

published a limited approval and 

limited disapproval of PCAPCD Rule 

502 and FRAQMD Rule 10.1 as adopted 

locally on October 28, 2010 and October 

5, 2009, respectively. We based our 

limited disapproval action on certain 

deficiencies in the submitted rule. This 

disapproval action started a sanctions 

clock for imposition of offset sanctions 

18 months after August 27, 2011 and 

highway sanctions 6 months later, 

pursuant to section 179 of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA) and our regulations at 40 

CFR 52.31. Under 40 CFR 52.31(d)(1), 

offset sanctions apply eighteen months 

after the effective date of a disapproval 

and highway sanctions apply six 

months after the offset sanctions, unless 

we determine that the deficiencies 

forming the basis of the disapproval 

have been corrected. 

On October 31, 2011 and February 7, 

2012, PCAPCD and FRAQMD adopted 

amended versions of Rules 502 and 

10.1, respectively, which were intended 

to correct the deficiencies identified in 

our July 27, 2011 limited disapproval 

action. On November 18, 2011 and 

September 21, 2012, the State submitted 

these amended rules to EPA. In the 

Proposed Rules section of today’s 

Federal Register, we are proposing a 

limited approval/limited disapproval of 

these rules because we believe it 

corrects the deficiencies identified in 

our July 27, 2011 disapproval action, 

but other revisions have created new 

deficiencies. Based on today’s proposed 

action, we are taking this final 

rulemaking action, effective on 

publication, to stay the imposition of 

the offset sanctions and to defer the 

imposition of the highway sanctions 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES